National
‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ comes to an end
Burden on gay, lesbian service members lifted Tuesday
An estimated 2 million U.S. service members were trained on gay-related issues in the run-up to next Tuesday’s lifting of the military’s gay ban. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
As gay and lesbian troops await the end of the 18-year-old ban on openly gay service members on Tuesday, observers say the change will have significant impact beyond the military.
“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will finally be lifted from the books thanks to the certification of repeal that President Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen sent to Congress on July 22. In accordance with the repeal law that President Obama signed in December, certification started a 60-day timeclock for the end of the ban on Sept. 20.
Aaron Belkin, author of “How We Won,” a book on the lessons learned for progressive causes resulting from “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, said the end of the military’s gay ban represents the end of what he called the “political paranoia” that led to the institution of the law in 1993.
“Just abstracting away from the question of LGBT rights that’s a danger to every American citizen,” Belkin said. “Sept. 20 is about the cultural change for the military and the political change for gay and lesbian troops … but I would say, even more importantly, it’s a moment when truth and fairness trumped paranoia, and that’s just critical.”
Jeff Krehely, director of the LGBT research and communications project at the Center for American Progress, said allowing open service will be significant for many Americans.
“‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal is huge and tremendous, but I think there are much larger implications for society because a lot of people really respect the military,” Krehely said.
Observers agree the process that led to the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will have a lasting impact as well.
Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said the training in which service members have been participating will have significant influence on the perspective with which troops — and the American public at large — view gay and lesbian people.
“They really took the time to train and educate the force on the various assets of this policy and hypotheticals,” Nicholson said. “It was an hour of instruction on gays and lesbians, on gay families, on gay partners and it was a really a normalization routine. It was really exposed to millions of America’s most conservative youth to the normality of gays and lesbians.”
Among the situations that the training addressed, Nicholson said, were gay troops holding hands, going on dates or participating in military events with their partners. Nearly 2 million service members received the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” training before certification took place on July 22, according to the Pentagon.
Workplace discrimination against LGBT people could be an issue that gains new focus after “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal. No federal law exists to protect LGBT workers against discrimination. Firing someone for being gay is legal in 29 states and firing someone for being transgender is legal in 35 states.
Krehely said open service could generate support for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would prohibit discrimination against LGBT workers in most situations in the public and private workforce, or encourage other employers to add protections for LGBT workers.
“The military is probably one of the biggest and most visible workplaces in our country,” Krehely said. “I think Sept. 20 is a clear indication that this discrimination should not be there any longer, and that we need to move forward on ENDA, and educate people about the broader workplace issues that we’re up against.”
Despite the potential for long-term impact, advocates say the change resulting in the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” won’t be immediately apparent and any impact of any lifting the gay ban will be more drawn out.
Krehely said the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” next week won’t mean the “world changes necessarily” on Tuesday.
“I think that it’s just people who want to serve their country will want to do that without living in fear,” Krehely said. “That’s the biggest change. It may not be visible, but it’s really important to those people and it’s really important to the military itself.”
Nicholson predicted Tuesday will be a “non-event” and said many gay service members will choose not to come out even though they won’t be in danger of dismissal now that the military’s gay ban is off the books.
“I think you’ll see a good number of them who decide not to come out,” Nicholson said. “I think the post-repeal military is going to resemble any conservative American workplace where individuals judge their willingness and their comfort level in coming out.”
According to the most recent findings from the Williams Institute at the University of California in Los Angeles, an estimated 48,500 lesbians, gay men and bisexuals serve on active duty or in the ready reserve in the U.S. military, while an additional 22,000 are in standby and retired reserve forces. These 70,500 service members make up 2.2 percent of the total force.
But what will happen to those service members who choose to be public about their sexual orientation? Will service members patronize their local gay bars while in uniform? Will Pride parades include contingents of openly gay troops?
Some gay troops have already started brandishing their military credentials during Pride celebrations. In July, about 200 active-duty troops and veterans marched in San Diego’s Pride parade. They weren’t wearing uniforms, but T-shirts indicating their branch of service. The event was the first time a military contingent participated in a Pride celebration in the United States.
Nicholson said that the standards that apply to straight service members with regard to uniforms will also apply to gay troops — so wearing the uniform may not be appropriate in some circumstances.
“Unless it’s some unusual circumstances, service members don’t wear their uniforms out to the bar,” Nicholson said. “I can pretty much guarantee that violations of long-standing and well-understood regulations like that for the sake of publicity is going to be frowned upon by gay troops because the community consensus is they want to blend in like everyone else and not have any special treatment.”
Nonetheless, gay troops will undoubtedly be visible in the post-repeal world. Belkin said the higher visibility of gay troops — and their relationships — following the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will add to the political pressure to advance the fight for same-sex marriage.
“We’re going to see gay and lesbian service members coming back from the Middle East and talking about the importance of marriage equality, and, very tragically, we’re going to see gay and lesbian service members fall in the battlefield and their partners, husbands and wives will not be dealt any benefits their straight counterparts have,” Belkin said. “That is going to illustrate for the public in a much more vivid way the stakes of the marriage debate.”
What’s the next frontier for those who worked to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?” Securing benefits for gay and lesbian troops is the next step advocates plan to take after the gay ban is lifted from the books.
The Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage, prevents the military from offering benefits to gay troops, such as health care benefits. But other benefits related to housing and legal services could be changed administratively.
Krehely said benefits for gay troops will be among the issues advocacy groups will be pushing for in the post-repeal world.
“I think that there are still some implementation issues that need to be worked out in terms of benefits and housing, and I think that’s something advocacy organizations and research groups are going to keep trying to make some progress on,” Krehely said.
National
Medical groups file lawsuit over Trump deletion of health information
Crucial datasets included LGBTQ, HIV resources
Nine private medical and public health advocacy organizations, including two from D.C., filed a lawsuit on May 20 in federal court in Seattle challenging what it calls the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’s illegal deletion of dozens or more of its webpages containing health related information, including HIV information.
The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, names as defendants Robert F. Kennedy Jr., secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and HHS itself, and several agencies operating under HHS and its directors, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration.
“This action challenges the widespread deletion of public health resources from federal agencies,” the lawsuit states. “Dozens (if not more) of taxpayer-funded webpages, databases, and other crucial resources have vanished since January 20, 2025, leaving doctors, nurses, researchers, and the public scrambling for information,” it says.
“These actions have undermined the longstanding, congressionally mandated regime; irreparably harmed Plaintiffs and others who rely on these federal resources; and put the nation’s public health infrastructure in unnecessary jeopardy,” the lawsuit continues.
It adds, “The removal of public health resources was apparently prompted by two recent executive orders – one focused on ‘gender ideology’ and the other targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (‘DEI’) programs. Defendants implemented these executive orders in a haphazard manner that resulted in the deletion (inadvertent or otherwise) of health-related websites and databases, including information related to pregnancy risks, public health datasets, information about opioid-use disorder, and many other valuable resources.”
The lawsuit does not mention that it was President Donald Trump who issued the two executive orders in question.
A White House spokesperson couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on the lawsuit.
While not mentioning Trump by name, the lawsuit names as defendants in addition to HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., Matthew Buzzelli, acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health; Martin Makary, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration; Thomas Engels, administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration; and Charles Ezell, acting director of the Office of Personnel Management.
The 44-page lawsuit complaint includes an addendum with a chart showing the titles or descriptions of 49 “affected resource” website pages that it says were deleted because of the executive orders. The chart shows that just four of the sites were restored after initially being deleted.
Of the 49 sites, 15 addressed LGBTQ-related health issues and six others addressed HIV issues, according to the chart.
“The unannounced and unprecedented deletion of these federal webpages and datasets came as a shock to the medical and scientific communities, which had come to rely on them to monitor and respond to disease outbreaks, assist physicians and other clinicians in daily care, and inform the public about a wide range of healthcare issues,” the lawsuit states.
“Health professionals, nonprofit organizations, and state and local authorities used the websites and datasets daily in care for their patients, to provide resources to their communities, and promote public health,” it says.
Jose Zuniga, president and CEO of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (IAPAC), one of the organizations that signed on as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in a statement that the deleted information from the HHS websites “includes essential information about LGBTQ+ health, gender and reproductive rights, clinical trial data, Mpox and other vaccine guidance and HIV prevention resources.”
Zuniga added, “IAPAC champions evidence-based, data-informed HIV responses and we reject ideologically driven efforts that undermine public health and erase marginalized communities.”
Lisa Amore, a spokesperson for Whitman-Walker Health, D.C.’s largest LGBTQ supportive health services provider, also expressed concern about the potential impact of the HHS website deletions.
“As the region’s leader in HIV care and prevention, Whitman-Walker Health relies on scientific data to help us drive our resources and measure our successes,” Amore said in response to a request for comment from the Washington Blade.
“The District of Columbia has made great strides in the fight against HIV,” Amore said. “But the removal of public facing information from the HHS website makes our collective work much harder and will set HIV care and prevention backward,” she said.
The lawsuit calls on the court to issue a declaratory judgement that the “deletion of public health webpages and resources is unlawful and invalid” and to issue a preliminary or permanent injunction ordering government officials named as defendants in the lawsuit “to restore the public health webpages and resources that have been deleted and to maintain their web domains in accordance with their statutory duties.”
It also calls on the court to require defendant government officials to “file a status report with the Court within twenty-four hours of entry of a preliminary injunction, and at regular intervals, thereafter, confirming compliance with these orders.”
The health organizations that joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs include the Washington State Medical Association, Washington State Nurses Association, Washington Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Academy Health, Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, Fast-Track Cities Institute, International Association of Providers of AIDS Care, National LGBT Cancer Network, and Vermont Medical Society.
The Fast-Track Cities Institute and International Association of Providers of AIDS Care are based in D.C.
U.S. Federal Courts
Federal judge scraps trans-inclusive workplace discrimination protections
Ruling appears to contradict US Supreme Court precedent
Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas has struck down guidelines by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission designed to protect against workplace harassment based on gender identity and sexual orientation.
The EEOC in April 2024 updated its guidelines to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), which determined that discrimination against transgender people constituted sex-based discrimination as proscribed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
To ensure compliance with the law, the agency recommended that employers honor their employees’ preferred pronouns while granting them access to bathrooms and allowing them to wear dress code-compliant clothing that aligns with their gender identities.
While the the guidelines are not legally binding, Kacsmaryk ruled that their issuance created “mandatory standards” exceeding the EEOC’s statutory authority that were “inconsistent with the text, history, and tradition of Title VII and recent Supreme Court precedent.”
“Title VII does not require employers or courts to blind themselves to the biological differences between men and women,” he wrote in the opinion.
The case, which was brought by the conservative think tank behind Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation, presents the greatest setback for LGBTQ inclusive workplace protections since President Donald Trump’s issuance of an executive order on the first day of his second term directing U.S. federal agencies to recognize only two genders as determined by birth sex.
Last month, top Democrats from both chambers of Congress reintroduced the Equality Act, which would codify LGBTQ-inclusive protections against discrimination into federal law, covering employment as well as areas like housing and jury service.
The White House
Trump travels to Middle East countries with death penalty for homosexuality
President traveled to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and United Arab Emirates
Homosexuality remains punishable by death in two of the three Middle East countries that President Donald Trump visited last week.
Saudi Arabia and Qatar are among the handful of countries in which anyone found guilty of engaging in consensual same-sex sexual relations could face the death penalty.
Trump was in Saudi Arabia from May 13-14. He traveled to Qatar on May 14.
“The law prohibited consensual same-sex sexual conduct between men but did not explicitly prohibit same-sex sexual relations between women,” notes the State Department’s 2023 human rights report, referring specifically to Qatar’s criminalization law. “The law was not systematically enforced. A man convicted of having consensual same-sex sexual relations could receive a sentence of seven years in prison. Under sharia, homosexuality was punishable by death; there were no reports of executions for this reason.”
Trump on May 15 arrived in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates.
The State Department’s 2023 human rights report notes the “penalty for individuals who engaged in ‘consensual sodomy with a man'” in the country “was a minimum prison sentence of six months if the individual’s partner or guardian filed a complaint.”
“There were no known reports of arrests or prosecutions for consensual same-sex sexual conduct. LGBTQI+ identity, real or perceived, could be deemed an act against ‘decency or public morality,’ but there were no reports during the year of persons prosecuted under these provisions,” reads the report.
The report notes Emirati law also criminalizes “men who dressed as women or entered a place designated for women while ‘disguised’ as a woman.” Anyone found guilty could face up to a year in prison and a fine of up to 10,000 dirhams ($2,722.60.)
Trump returned to the U.S. on May 16.
The White House notes Trump during the trip secured more than $2 trillion “in investment agreements with Middle Eastern nations ($200 billion with the United Arab Emirates, $600 billion with Saudi Arabia, and $1.2 trillion with Qatar) for a more safe and prosperous future.”
Former President Joe Biden traveled to Saudi Arabia in 2022.
Saudi Arabia is scheduled to host the 2034 World Cup. The 2022 World Cup took place in Qatar.
Let love and compassion guide our response to Joe Biden’s cancer diagnosis
D.C. Black Pride 2025: Events, parties, and empowerment
Cuban lawmakers to consider simplifying process for trans people to change IDs
Frank Kameny’s legacy lives on
